IATCA changes name and moves to new 심사원 등록 criteria
What does this mean for auditors wishing to become certified to the IATCA criteria?
What does this mean for currently certified IATCA auditors?
When will the new IPC criteria be available?
Will the new certification criteria be different?
Will certification to the competency-based criteria cost more?
What do Certification Bodies/Registrars think of this?
First, IATCA itself has changed. In fact, IATCA is no more and in its place is IPC, the International Personnel Certification Association . The reasons for this change are simple. Members of IATCA recognized that there are now many sectors within business, industry and government that require and benefit from personnel certification. IATCA was established 10 years ago expressly to address the management systems market. During those 10 years the requirement for personnel certification has extended into many more areas and management systems now forms only a small part of the personnel certification market. To accommodate those changes IATCA has expanded its remit to include and contribute within those other areas, and has evolved into IPC.
IPC differs from IATCA in that the membership requirements have changed. Full IPC membership is restricted to those personnel certification bodies who are accredited to the new ISO standard for accreditation of personnel certification bodies; ISO 17024. Other organizations may contribute and be involved within IPC as associate members, for instance training and examining organizations and recognized accreditation bodies, but essentially, IPC will be operated by those organizations accredited against ISO 17024 to offer personnel certification.
IATCA considered a change of name was necessary for two reasons. The first is that the IATCA 'brand name' is associated entirely with management systems. And second, because training is no longer a required component of certification it is misleading to incorporate it within the association's name.
The intention is that IPC attracts and contributes its services to a far greater range of stakeholders, and it will be much more successful in achieving this with a new brand, a new mission and by actively involving a greater range of interests.
What does this mean for auditors wishing to become certified to the IATCA criteria?
IRCA and other personnel certification bodies authorized to issue IATCA certificates may do so until September, 2006. The certificates will be issued under the IPC name, but they will be in accordance with the current IATCA criteria.
What does this mean for currently certified IATCA auditors?
First, your IATCA (IPC) certification will continue to be valid until at least September, 2006 (provided of course that you continue to meet the criteria). You can renew certification against the current criteria up until September 2006. If your recertification becomes due after September 2006 you will be required to renew against (i.e. transfer to) the new criteria. All IPC certificates issued against the current (IATCA) criteria will lapse at September 2009.
When will the new IPC criteria be available?
The new criteria are intended to be available later in 2005 but the rules determining which members of IPC are permitted to issue certificates against these new criteria have not yet been agreed.
Will the new certification criteria be different?
Yes. The emphasis of the new criteria will be the demonstration of defined competences by independent examination. IPC will define the competences and will suggest a number of examination methods by which the personnel certification bodies may require you to demonstrate you have acquired these competences. The main difference is there is no longer a requirement to complete certified training. Some training is required but this will be directed at the gaps in competence and will differ from person to person.
Will certification to the competency-based criteria cost more?
We cannot say for certain, but the likelihood of an increase in fees ranges from 'probably' to 'almost certainly'. This is because the evaluation is more complex than the current format. ISO 17024 requires we look at three categories for evaluation; personal attributes, auditing-related knowledge and auditing skills. Although IPC hasn't yet decided on the detail of evaluation and examination, it is very likely to involve either you, the applicant, in more cost, or it will cost us more, and we will pass on the additional cost to you. For example, the newly-merged RABQSA organization requires applicants to have their auditing skills assessed, most likely at assessment centres and this must add significantly to the cost.
Another way of asking this question might be, 'Will customers be prepared to pay more for auditors who have an accredited, competency-based certification?' The answer to this is not straightforward, and will depend on a number of factors; What country the auditor works in, whether the certification bodies/registrars prefer their auditors to have competency-based certification, whether the customers understand the differences between the current format and the competency-based format, whether the accreditation bodies are able to avoid confusing the market by implementing ISO 17024 accreditation differently in different countries. In short, only time will tell and those auditors who invest in gaining competency-based accredited certification will have no assurance that their investment will pay off.
What do Certification Bodies/Registrars think of this?
The one's we have talked to so far indicate they are adopting a wait and see approach (see below).
Our approach is, as ever, to contribute value by providing what users want. And as at this time, it is not clear what they want. The situation so far is that we have a new accreditation standard (ISO 17024) that requires auditor certification bodies to apply a much more rigorous approach. But already it is clear there is little consistency between the different accreditation bodies in how they interpret and implement this standard. This is bound to lead to variation in the levels at which auditors are certified which, because the differing standards will all be 'accredited', will confuse the users.
The majority of certification bodies/registrars we have talked to do not intend to do anything until it is clear that the competency-based certification contributes clear benefits to them. Currently, we are talking to a range of stakeholders (including accreditation bodies) and drafting criteria options based on what we understand customers want, and in accordance with how the accreditation body interprets 17024. In other words, what our customers want and what the accreditation body allows us to offer!
We are also contributing our expertise to the two new IAF working groups tasked with looking at auditing within a third-party environment, and how ISO 17024 can be interpreted and applied internationally. We believe a structural approach to this new initiative is best. Once we have achieved agreement across a broad range of stakeholders (accreditation bodies, certification bodies/registrars, auditors and users of auditors) as to what an ISO 17024 competency-based system means, i.e. how the standard should be interpreted and implemented, then we will be in a much better position to develop and offer meaningful criteria. By meaningful we mean a certification that will be accepted, valued and recognized.
Do you want to attend an 심사원 연수 course?
Find an IRCA
certified training course here.